Prometheus - Ridley Scott's 'Alien Prequel' (or not)...
Discussion
goldblum said:
Look up what an ad hominem is, and the context of its usage.
I know what one is. Perhaps you don't realise that the majority of your posts come across as supercilious, condescending, and with lots of scorn and denigration towards the person(s) you disagree with (either implicitly or explicitly). Persistently calling people "fanboys" with all the negative connotations that it implies is a case in point. Especially when you suggest that said "fanboys" think that Prometheus is lacking because it doesn't have loads of obscure geeky references to previous films. As others have pointed out, it's not that; it's just that the film is a bit rubbish. However, I'm glad that it more than met your own low standards for an enjoyable film and that you were suitably entertained.
goldblum said:
g3org3y said:
Good films typically require good characters. It is an important part (fundamental?) part of film making. Whether the audience empathises with them, hates them, relates with them or whatever - the characters are what the audience uses to immerse themselves into the story.
Wrong. There are a number of other elements to a story than just the characters in it.
Crudely speaking, poor characters = poor film.
Very crudely. Wrong. There are a number of other elements to a story than just the characters in it.
Crudely speaking, poor characters = poor film.
Others might think poor characters + good story + good SFX = enjoyable movie.
Prometheus is not marketed to be such a film.
goldblum said:
g3org3y said:
There is no doubt in my mind the characters presented in Prometheus are poor (Fassbender's David expected) in terms of dialogue, behaviour and consistency.
So - poor storyline and script and characters. Makes you wonder how they got away with it. 
If getting away with it means widespread critical acclaim, then they did not. The >100 page thread on here is a testament to that.
No-one is doubting great sets, great effects and lovely cinematography. However for great sci-fi you need great characters (and a consistent/believable story) and that is where Prometheus falls way short.
From Wiki:
Wikipedia said:
Ian Nathan of Empire magazine was unimpressed by Rapace—whom he described as an unconvincing lead—and said that with "a lack of suspense, threadbare characters, and a very poor script, the stunning visuals, gloopy madness, and sterling Fassbenderiness can’t prevent Prometheus feeling like Alien's poor relation.
^This sums up my opinion.Prometheus pleases on a superficial level. As I said, scratch below the surface and 'obvious failings are obvious'.
In 20 years, Alien and Aliens will still be played as examples of sci-fi brilliance. Prometheus will spawn a sequel and both will be forgotten as per the AVP franchise.
g3org3y said:
Of which recent examples include Pacific Rim. Leave brain at door, enjoy loud noises and lots of action. That format work with the right film.
Indeed. Ironically, I really enjoyed Pacific Rim. It laid out its stall, promised what it would deliver, and then delivered it. Complete tongue-in-cheek nonsense, for sure, but it didn't take itself seriously and it didn't ask its audience to take it seriously either. g3org3y said:
Prometheus is not marketed to be such a film.
This is it I think - people were hoping that months of positive hype and rumour about Prometheus would pay off. And when just a better than ordinary sci-fi flick was released they couldn't stop their disappointment colouring their opinion.g3org3y said:
If getting away with it means widespread critical acclaim, then they did not. The >100 page thread on here is a testament to that.
It's an Alien franchise devotee thread that in no way mirrors the thoughts of the general public.g3org3y said:
No-one is doubting great sets, great effects and lovely cinematography. However for great sci-fi you need great characters (and a consistent/believable story) and that is where Prometheus falls way short.
Quite possibly. It seems a lot of people aren't that bothered though and thought the movie good nonetheless.From Wiki:
Wikipedia said:
Ian Nathan of Empire magazine was unimpressed by Rapace—whom he described as an unconvincing lead—and said that with "a lack of suspense, threadbare characters, and a very poor script, the stunning visuals, gloopy madness, and sterling Fassbenderiness can’t prevent Prometheus feeling like Alien's poor relation.
g3org3y said:
^This sums up my opinion.
That critique lists 3 plus points and 3 minus. I'd say that means the reviewer thinks it's average, a "poor relation" to a better movie - Alien. Which is exactly what I said on the previous page.g3org3y said:
Prometheus pleases on a superficial level. As I said, scratch below the surface and 'obvious failings are obvious'.
So it pleases a bit eh?g3org3y said:
In 20 years, Alien and Aliens will still be played as examples of sci-fi brilliance. Prometheus will spawn a sequel and both will be forgotten as per the AVP franchise.
Once again - Aliens isn't really sci-fi, it's the Battle of the Alamo or Assault on Precinct 13, if you like, done in space. I hate to say it but I quite enjoyed AVP 1, poor though it was. 
goldblum said:
It's an Alien franchise devotee thread that in no way mirrors the thoughts of the general public.
I disagree. Very few comments have bemoaned the fact that it fails to be an Alien franchise film although some have commented that it would have been better had it made its bloody mind up about whether it was or wasn't. Most of the comments have been critique about the film itself. Anyway, as is often the case we seem to have got to that impasse stage where we start to go round in circles and further discussion is very likely going to be fruitless.
I think the main problem with Prometheus was that it promised quite a bit and ultimately delivered very little.
The visuals were done exceptionally well, but the storyline was jagged and full of holes. The base elements for a good story were there, but it wasn't stitched together properly, almost like the film was cut and pasted.
It was never going to live up to most people's expectations, but to fall short on the basics of story telling is just poor. It almost tried to be too clever and then ran out of time to actually answer it's own questions; so instead it just used barely adequate answers that partially closed off the question.
My personal opinion; Ridley can still salvage Prometheus if he makes a decent sequel that answers some of the questions from the first one and moves the story forward. In fact, I reckon Prometheus and a sequel could be considered top sci-fi films if done correctly. It's not impossible to save Prometheus and make it part of an excellent trilogy.
The visuals were done exceptionally well, but the storyline was jagged and full of holes. The base elements for a good story were there, but it wasn't stitched together properly, almost like the film was cut and pasted.
It was never going to live up to most people's expectations, but to fall short on the basics of story telling is just poor. It almost tried to be too clever and then ran out of time to actually answer it's own questions; so instead it just used barely adequate answers that partially closed off the question.
My personal opinion; Ridley can still salvage Prometheus if he makes a decent sequel that answers some of the questions from the first one and moves the story forward. In fact, I reckon Prometheus and a sequel could be considered top sci-fi films if done correctly. It's not impossible to save Prometheus and make it part of an excellent trilogy.
Have to agree, the film seems like it's been badly edited and is missing bits. This kind of thing is usually down to too much studio interference but by all accounts Scott had a free reign so not really sure what happened. I know there is a lot more footage, about 30 minutes worth but apparently those who have seen it say it's pretty poor and Scott is not interested in doing a directors cut anyway.
A very simple example, the mapping expert gets an attack of Xenophobia so decides to head back to the ship with his buddy in tow. Inexplicably this guy whose actual JOB it was to map out the whole installation with his super advanced drone technology then gets LOST. They then run into a very freaky looking alien and the guy who 5 minutes ago was freaking out about all the scary aliens decides he wants to try to pet an alien which looks like a nightmare amalgam of cobra and vagina. Meanwhile inexplicably the rest of the team who have no problems finding their way out are now safely back in the ship and no ones thinks to ask where those two guys who left ages ago are until the approaching storm (handy dial-a-disaster right on cue) suddenly approaches.
The whole sequence is illogical, disjointed, the motivations make absolutely no sense and it's just jarring and this is just one example, the whole film is full of stuff like this.
It's a shame because the film does occasionally show some potential but the execution seems to have been badly fumbled, it's the kind of film-making I expect from Paul W.S. Anderson (he of AvP fame) not someone of Ridley Scott's calibre.
A very simple example, the mapping expert gets an attack of Xenophobia so decides to head back to the ship with his buddy in tow. Inexplicably this guy whose actual JOB it was to map out the whole installation with his super advanced drone technology then gets LOST. They then run into a very freaky looking alien and the guy who 5 minutes ago was freaking out about all the scary aliens decides he wants to try to pet an alien which looks like a nightmare amalgam of cobra and vagina. Meanwhile inexplicably the rest of the team who have no problems finding their way out are now safely back in the ship and no ones thinks to ask where those two guys who left ages ago are until the approaching storm (handy dial-a-disaster right on cue) suddenly approaches.
The whole sequence is illogical, disjointed, the motivations make absolutely no sense and it's just jarring and this is just one example, the whole film is full of stuff like this.
It's a shame because the film does occasionally show some potential but the execution seems to have been badly fumbled, it's the kind of film-making I expect from Paul W.S. Anderson (he of AvP fame) not someone of Ridley Scott's calibre.
TheEnd said:
Cheers for that.When you read that it puts a few things into perspective.
Were the script changes made after filming began?
TheEnd said:
See also this... http://www.empireonline.com/interviews/interview.a...
And if you really want to wade through the original script, it is here:
http://www.joblo.com/scripts/Alien-Engineers-ORIGI...
Read page 90 onwards for the Medpod scene. It's pretty good.
Edited by JonRB on Thursday 27th February 17:12
Why were expectations so high for this? Why did anyone want an explanation for the original film?
Surely it was better left untold, I didnt mind the film, I also knew it wouldnt live up to my expectations, if I have a problem with it, it is that this story would have been better left untold, the amount of reboots, remakes and general unoriginal crap out of Hollywood is why I only watch independent films, or films with unknowns in, or obscure films, anything to avoid the s
t the big studios are churning out, I find the whole film experiance better that way.
Surely it was better left untold, I didnt mind the film, I also knew it wouldnt live up to my expectations, if I have a problem with it, it is that this story would have been better left untold, the amount of reboots, remakes and general unoriginal crap out of Hollywood is why I only watch independent films, or films with unknowns in, or obscure films, anything to avoid the s
t the big studios are churning out, I find the whole film experiance better that way. 
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff